Sunday, January 16, 2011

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff will go on trial in Vienna on Tuesday for “insulting a religion”. Below is the (translated) official document submitted to the court by her defense, detailing her responses to the specific charges against her.

In furtherance of preparation of the trial on January 18, 2011, the defendant offers the following

SUBMISSION:

By means of a handout in the trial of November 23, 2010, the defendant was questioned by the court on nine of her statements in lectures.

I. To Points (1) and (2) of the Handout

So, taqiya — the rule of deceiving the opponent — if you understand that…The religious lie is not only allowed, but required. We are being lied to 24 hours a day!

So, back to the taqiya theme and the Hadith. It is not only in the Koran, but also in the Hadith, that it is allowed to deceive in war; and Muslims are in a perpetual war with us, that is clear. Therefore: deception.

Explanations for this are found in the legal document of November 22, 2010 under III.3.10.

To that the following supplement:

“To the leitmotivs of Koranic theology belongs the sentence ‘Allah guides rightly whom he will, and leads into error whom he will.’ It contains the rejection of human free will. Allah has already decided whom he wants in paradise or in hell. The Koran champions the concept of strict predestination.”

“…as (it is) for human free will, which the Koran denies, because Allah “guides rightly whom he will and leads into error whom he will,” leaving the question open, how that is in order with the justice of a god who punishes the sinners he himself has led into hell-fire.”

Both are proposed as proof that the religiously sanctioned lie is a part of Islam. Mohammed is accepted as the great model for all Muslims; he is to be emulated insofar as possible, since he is the perfect human being (for more on this, see VI.). When it is in the sense of their religion, therefore, Muslims have to mislead.

The defendant’s statements are therefore true.

II. To Point 3) of the Handout

I wanted to say that before; Muslims despise us for that. The Muslims want war. War against someone weaker is vapid. It does not matter what kind of a war it is. It need not be with weapons, but with words, and there too it is boring against a weaker party. They hate us. No matter whether it is in the Koran or not. They do it. And we have our values and we must defend them. We are a civilization, in contrast to the so-called Muslim civilization. Therefore, we must stand up and defend ourselves.

This passage with the corresponding commentary in Point III.3.23 is found in the legal document of January 22, 2010.

Submitted complementary to that is an interview printed in the magazine NEWS number 47, given by Shaker Assem, the spokesman of the Islamist party, Hizb ut-Tahir, which is banned in Germany but active in Austria.

Shaker Assem describes the goal of Hizb ut-Tahir: “to unite all Muslims into an Islamic state (caliphate), to introduce sharia and to free the Islamic world of Western influences.”

Shaker Assem says that democracy and Western constitutions, hence also the Austrian constitution, must be rejected: “We say clearly that Western constitutions are not our constitutions. Further: “Democracy means that law — legislation — proceeds from the people. In Islam on the contrary, laws are of a divine origin and come from Koran and Sunna.”

In answer to the question, what sanction married people faced in cased of adultery, Shaker Assem answered: “Death, for both of them.”

Shaker Assem said further in reference to the ban on HT activities in the Federal Republic of Germany: “The basis for the ban was that we deny the right of Israel to exist.” In Austria conversely, “we can be active undisturbed.”

Proof: Reading of the interview of Shaker Assem in “NEWS” number 47 of November 25, 2010 on page 47 (enclosure ./91)

This article serves as evidence that

There exists in Islam a rejection of Western values like democracy, constitutional government, separation of church and state; and those who advance these values, advance and defend them.

According to the law established in the Koran “to combat infidels,” (Koran, sura 2, verse 1891 ff. and sura 4, verse 74ff. et alii) — [they] must be opposed; the goal of Islam is to introduce sharia.

In connection with this evidential theme, attention is also directed to the book “The Great Cover-Up”, by Alice Schwarzer (ed.). Therein, under the title “Democracy or Theocracy,” it is described how the Islamic political symbol of the head covering and the ongoing conflict in the Federal Republic of Germany was — and continues to be — used to gain increased membership and influence for Islamic organizations in individual federal states (at the onset of the 21st century, an Afghan-German teacher, Fereshda Ludin, occupied the German courts with the “Head Scarf Controversy”):

“Intelligence Services revealed publicly in November 2003 what the well-informed had already known for a long time: Fereshda Ludin, who would have liked so much to be an official teacher with head-scarf, was on the executive board of ‘Muslim Youth’ from 1997 to 1999. This youth group, partially financed by the federal family ministry, is said to have had ‘organizational and personal contacts’ with suspicious organizations: the militant Muslim Brotherhood (Arabic) and the Islamist Milli Görüs (Turkish).

“And so the circle closes again: Who called up the pro-head scarf demonstrations in Berlin And Cologne? — The ‘Muslim Youth,’ long-led by Ludin. It can no longer be overlooked that a small, well-schooled elite is being sent ahead — as in Cologne — to make pseudo-feminist propaganda for the covering of women.”

Muslim sisters of this type also marched out front in the demonstrations in Cologne in 2004, inspired by their model, Zaynab Ghazali, who 50 years ago wrote: ‘We Muslims only carry weapons to spread peace. We want to purify the world of unbelief and atheism.’

This essay, “Resist Sharia in Ückendorf!” in the book just referenced, serves as further evidence for the statements of the defendant, especially in reference to the war of words, the rejection of “infidels” and the intervention of Islamists for the establishment of sharia. In this essay, the following can be read in reference to wearing the head scarf as a political symbol in a German school:

“The [Muslim] candidate for a teaching position in the government school service not only insists on wearing the head scarf while teaching. She also refuses to shake hands with men. And she admits openly that the Koran, ergo sharia, is the highest law for her.”

“Why are there only a hand-full of democracies among over 50 Islamic countries, and why is the situation, especially of women, ethnic and religious minorities so precarious in these democratic countries (to say nothing of the others)?…”

“…However, since Muslim and non-Muslim societies are distinguished by their religion, the suspicion arises that Islam is the root cause of this state of affairs.

“Now the founder of a religion becomes a politician who makes short shrift of his opponents and those of the new faith. Thus with the two Jewish tribes of Medina whose rabbis mock him because of his deficient knowledge of the Bible: the one tribe is driven out, the other exterminated.

“That is, the Prophet no longer finds it necessary to allow himself to be mocked: anyone who doe that dies. And the hadith mentioned (can be read in enclosure ./85, Sahin al — Bukhari, Reports of the Deeds and Sayings of the Prophet Mohammed, Stuttgart, 2006, IV 25, pages 71f.) mentions with satisfaction that Abu Jahl and the five other buffoons — those with the afterbirth of the female camel — lost their lives in the battle at Badr in 624. In the ten years up to his death, the Prophet led no less than 27 campaigns, in the course of which not only Mecca was reconquered (and the Ka’aba “purified,” i.e., consecrated to Allah), but the entire Arabian peninsula subjugated.”

Proof: Reading of pages 60-62 (quote page 62), “2. The Biography of the Prophet Mohammed and the Origin of the Koran,” in “The Jihad System.” How Islam functions, by Manfred Kleine-Hartlage (2010) (enclosure ./90)

Further proof of the glorification of war and violence against people of other faiths and continuing themes of Islamic theology:

These themes are:

Jihad in the sense of military war against “infidels” with the goal of their death or subjugation

The legitimization of this jihad through polemic rhetoric

The Prophet’s claim to absolute obedience

Regulation of community life through norms of a juridical character

…When I say that jihad belongs among the themes of the Medina suras (suras composed during Mohammed’s stay in Medina — note), I refer exclusively to the places that have to do with military, or, in an case, violent combating, subjugation and killing of infidels. This theme is present in not less than fourteen of twenty-four Medina suras and in different variants:

condemnation of Muslims who do not wish to take part in the battle (eight suras [2, 4, 9. 33, 47, 48, 57] ),

interpretation of military success as proof of the truth of Islam and of Mohammed’s prophetic mission (seven suras [3, 8, 9, 48, 50] ),

rules for the division of booty (five suras [3, 8, 9, 48, 59] ).

3.2.5 the upshot is:

In Medina the Islamic umma spread from the religious community to the body politic. This political body functions as a fighting machine, which was active from the beginning in battling and subjugating people of other faiths. The Medina Koran not only reflects this situation; it likewise sets a series of social norms and values which are aimed at giving the umma a maximum of assertiveness versus the communities of infidels.:

It defines the Islamic umma — ergo a religious community — as the only legitimate reference point of political solidarity and loyalty. It is accurate that the political unity of the Muslims, even at the times of the great empires of the Umayyads, Abbasids and Ottomans, was more fiction than reality, and today even more so; that there were normally several power centers which were often in bitter competition with one another. That could not be otherwise, since Islam, as we have seen, does not make the legitimacy of rule dependent on a particular system. The claim to be “the true Imam of the Muslims” (Bassam Tibi), could in principle be made by anyone, even against the caliph.

[…] rather, precisely the anarchical structure of the umma leads in case of doubt to the escalation of conflicts which of themselves would be manageable. Clearly stated, it leads to Islam’s structural incapacity for peace.

[…] “infidels” who do not submit (politically) to Muslims forfeit any claim to social consideration, including the right to live.

[…] control of feminine sexuality, that is control over the women in their own community, and simultaneous taking of “infidel” women, plays an important role.

[…] the Koran does not just demand the rule of Allah in place of the rule of man, it also effectively provides that this rule (that is, the social validity of the ideology which is rooted in Islam) is made perpetual.

So we see that the true jihad norms which declare armed battle against the “infidels” to be the highest duty of a Muslim and make the health of his soul dependent on the readiness to kill and die “in the way of Allah,” are just the last link in an unbroken chain of standards which, applied and internalized as a cultural matter of course, constitutes Islam as a social system bent upon expansion at the cost of non-Muslim communities. Wherever Muslim societies meet non-Muslim societies, this system of norms and values provides that Islam tends toward their subjugation, subversion and destruction.”

These text passages also serve as proof that Islam is designed to be warlike and leaves a believing Muslim no other choice than to be led to war — it can be of different types, including with words [as the defendant emphatically noted; see “actual wording” from the handout] — to dedicate himself and to convert or subjugate all non-Muslims.

[…] children of Islamic immigrants to Europe are becoming increasingly violent and in broad segments reject democracy and the rule of law.

[…] Pipes speaks of the remaining “five, ten or fifteen years” after which there will be violent changes. He means not only the burning of thousands of vehicles by young Muslims, as in the Muslim riots in France in 2005 — Pipes is speaking of the deaths there will be then.

[…] Of those who are supposed to finance our pensions, at least 20%, according to official statements of the Federal Republic (note: Federal Republic of Germany), intend to establish Islam right here in Europe with brutal violence. On page 319 of the Federal Republic’s study, “Muslims in German,” published in July, 2007, stands: “More than one-fifth of the youth consider offensive use of violence for the spread and implementation of Islam to be justified.” Every fourth young Muslim in Germany is prepared to proceed violently against infidels.

[…] 40% of them want the introduction of sharia in Great Britain, a third demand the establishment of a religious dictatorship, 40% believe that unmarried men and women may not live together and 24% see women as inferior beings.” (Note: Those questioned for this study are students!)

This evidence, too, serves as proof that violence, war and the desire to introduce sharia are the most urgent goals of believing Muslims.

The defendant’ s statements are therefore true.

III. To Point 4) of the Handout

We have been talking since the 7th century and what has come out of that exactly? And she was speechless. And then she says; ‘But you cannot forget that evil cardinals rape children, that cannot be forgotten.” And I said: “Yes, that is reprehensible, but tell me where that is prescribed in the Bible, and allowed and desired. cardinals do that despite their religion; Muslims do it because of their religion.”

A position on this has been taken in the document of November 22, 2010, under point III.3.28. Introduced as supplementary proof:

Under point “2.2.4.4 Demographic Expansion through Polygyny and Abduction of Women” in the book “The Jihad System” (enclosure ./90) is one of innumerable reports from Christian aid organizations, in this case by the “Christian Solidarity International,” on this special kind of sexually abusive jihad:

“The parents of the 15-year old Coptic Christian Demiana Makram Hanna are in complete despair. Islamists abducted their daughter in July, 2006. They are expected to pay the equivalent of 4,500 Francs ransom. […]

It is part of the ‘holy war’ of Islamists in Egypt to abduct young Coptic Christian women. They are raped and forced to marry against their will. Until now, the Egyptian state has frequently shielded the Islamist kidnappers and has not cleared up a single one of these inhuman crimes. Demiana’s fate is representative of that of many other abducted Christian women.

…Young Christian women are abducted, raped, forced to convert to Islam and finally coerced into marriage. Through this strategy of humiliation and intimidation, the kidnappers and their background financiers are working toward the complete Islamization of the country. For, all children from such a marriage must be raised Islamic.

“The Muslim man who regards and treats his wife as property, controls her and beats her and even kills her when he feels it is appropriate, is not simply acting for himself, but as an agent of the Islamic umma, which approves, demands, conceals and supports this behavior, because the woman — who is the property of the man — is likewise in the service of the community. The man, as Allah’s representative on earth, makes sure that the woman never gets the idea that she could possibly own herself.

Pakistan is only one Islamic land with a bad reputation, but by no means the only example of one in which thousands of women are sitting in prisons when their only crime is having been raped! (Human rights organizations estimate that the majority of the 7,000 prisoners in Pakistani prisons are “behind bars for adultery.” Dorothea Hahn, The Suffering of the Woman: A Bestseller, in TAZ, January 24, 2006).

Here again we have to do with that ambiguity of Islamic law which we have already noticed in connection with the legal situation of the Dhimmis, and in which an officially valid standard contains a means of being bypassed.

[…] the woman who claims to have been raped must bring four witnesses to confirm that she did not voluntarily have sex — a rule which makes proof of rape next to impossible, which transforms the accusation of rape into a self-accusation:

A woman who claims to have been raped admits ipso facto having sex. If she cannot prove that she was forced, it is taken that she wanted it and she has admitted to adultery or extra-marital sex. In other words: Raped women have no de facto legal protection. (Hasam Mahmud, How Sharia Law Punishes Raped Women. in: FrontPageMagazine.com, November 17, 2008).”

In such circumstances, the threat of rape hangs over all Muslim women like the sword of Damocles, and they can keep this risk only halfway at bay by strict observance of the Islamic code of behavior. This is by no means true only for countries in which Islamic law is practiced.

[…] They apply even in countries like France.

[…] From the start, you could know, indeed had to know, that the overwhelmingly Muslim residents of these suburbs (Note: “banlieues”) had long since created their own law and maintained it with brutal violence:

[…] Men in the banlieue can completely assume the life style of French young people — pop music, fast cars and pornography — but they also frequently take on the prejudices of their immigrant parents when it comes to women: A neighbor girl who smokes, uses make-up or dresses to be attractive is a whore. Bellil’s attackers targeted her because she dressed as she liked, spent time in the company of men and like to dance — besides, she had started a romance with another teenager.

[…] a girl who has been raped once may be raped again and again with no sense of guilt on the part of the perpetrator. What is damaged by the rape is not the personal rights, the autonomy and the bodily integrity of the victim — as we infidels would define the injustice of a rape — but on the contrary, the right of ownership of her family, ergo the right to the virginity of their daughter, that is, the family honor. Both are destroyed by the first rape and it is no longer a question of her injury.”

In an exhaustive investigative article about the housing projects in Lyon, Figaro journalist, Marie-Estelle Pech quotes a teacher at a public as follows:

…that a girl wearing a dress or other chic Western clothes “is asking for it.” And she often gets it. The most alarming stories in Pech’s investigation concern the “tournantes” — gang rapes. Girls whose fathers or brothers, for whatever reason, are not there to protect them, are loaned out by their friends to other members of their band.”

[…] “What else can a girl do, who grows up in such a district and hears of such incidents, other than conform to the Islamic code of conduct?”

[…] The chief prosecutor of Berlin, Roman Reusch, for years successful leader of the “multiple offenders” division of the Berlin prosecutor’s office, writes:

Girls and young women, who — in the truest sense of the word — fall into the hands of these perpetrators must always expect to become the victims of sexual attacks,usually accompanied by insults like “German slut,” “German whore,” etc. Actions like this are frequently shaped by the perpetrator’s presumption and contempt for humanity which for the most part has its roots in the nationalistic-religious delusion of superiority of young Muslim criminals, which is expressed in an especially repulsive manner against “infidel” women and girls. The attitude underlying these actions is expressed especially clearly in the fact that the greatest reproach that can be leveled at a Muslim girl is, that she behaves like a German.

[…] The Prophet Mohammed was the only religious founder who quite naturally took women as plunder of war and added them to his harem. And the Koran also expressly allows taking married women as slaves and concubines. A fundamental social disapproval of the rape of non-Muslims in Islamic societies (and parallel societies) is in inverse proportion to the strength of the society’s religious orientation.”

“Earlier they burned trash cans and cars — now they are burning girls.” This sentence was spoken by Kahina Benziana, after her sister Sohane on October 4, 2002 in the Paris banlieue Vitry had been raped, tortured and burned alive by her classmates. In contrast to her sister, who moved away and is studying sociology, Sohane had stayed behind in their quarter of the city. However, she had dared to live like her sister; that is, using make-up, going out at night and having a boyfriend. That cost her her life. Because by doing that she was not one of the respectable girls, but one of the “putes,” the whores.

“After fourteen-year old Samira had slept with gang leader, Jaid. she became fair game. She is now a slut one can do with as he wishes, a “Kellermädchen.” Three times she has been the victim of gang rapes. Stigmatized, she leaves school, wanders the streets, descends into drugs and violence. It is 15 years before Samira finally speaks — and by dong that, unleashes a scandal.”

All these sources and quotations serve as evidence of the fact that Muslims (not: the Muslims) rape because of their religion, because women are seen as inferior and have submitted to severe Islamic rules. With an infraction of these rules, women customarily lose their respectability and are regarded by Muslim men as fair game. The religion, therefore, indirectly gives Muslims the right to rape women, since the burden of proof is on the woman, in that she has to prove through four witnesses that she was raped. Otherwise, voluntary sexual intercourse is assumed rather than rape.

These deleterious practices occur not only in radical Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia or in the Taliban strongholds of Afghanistan, but also in Muslim parallel societies all over the world, especially in countries like France, Germany and England.

The defendant’s statements, therefore, are true.

IV. On Point (5) of the Handout

What happens when the Muslim population increases by 2-3%? Then it starts: mass conversions, even in the prisons, and the first street gangs. Like in Denmark. Thank God for the Hell’s Angels in Denmark. They strike back… So, 20%, the first riots, murders, burning down churches and synagogues — we have all that to look forward to.

The sympathy for groups — even if it is the “Hell’s Angels” — who resist radical Islamic, raping, plundering and terrorizing bands — is not only not culpable, but is based on the fact that only their presence gives strength to holding back radical Islamic criminality.

A position was taken in regard to that under III.3.30 in the pleading of November 22, 2010.

Supplementary explanation:

“Under the leadership of criminologist Christian Pfeiffer in Spring 2009, there appeared the study “Young People in Germany as Victims and Perpetrators of Violence,” in which experiences of 9th class students as victims and perpetrators were investigated and in which the ethnic background of those questioned was identified not by citizenship but by nationality or place of birth.

Among other things, the study revealed,

that violent crimes are committed three and one-half times more often by non-Germans on Germans rather than the reverse,

that a noticeably high percentage of non-German perpetrators comes from the Turkish group.

that in the case of sexual violence the proportion of Turkish perpetrators is more than double that of “Yugoslavians,” exactly twice the relative proportion in the test sample. (In individual cases, with further evidence.)”

“After the Danish Cartoon Conflict which he had sponsored, Imam Abu Laban squeezed the Danish authorities for something which hardly any other could have managed.: Danish prison guards — thanks to Imam Abu Laban — now speak Arabic. It is no secret that the number of Arabic-speaking prisoners in Danish prisons is rising.”

“More than any others, young girls have multicultural experiences. How does it affect girls when the new imam of Denmark tells them in all seriousness that only the head scarf will protect them against rape, […] If a woman goes running around unveiled, she is leading men “into temptation.” Women should finally stop leading men into temptation — that is, they have to wear the headscarf.”

Muslim racism has also become a problem in Denmark:

“While, for instance, the yearly folk festival of the Kalalit (aboriginal residents of Greenland, which is a possession of Denmark, Note) in 2007 was still able to go on under police protection in Aarhus-Gellerup on July 21st , it was dropped in 2008 because of continuously worsening Muslim violence.”

All these sources serve as evidence that societies are compelled by Islam to do what is considered in Islam to be right and required. Women are forced to give up their freedom and live according to Islamic law, so as to be safe from raping gangs.

Churches and churchgoers are attacked, members of other ethnic groups are racially discriminated against.

The defendant’s statements are therefore true.

V. On Point (6) of the Handout

I am walking to H&M on Meidlinger Hauptstrasse, suspecting nothing, and there comes a burqa phantom in my direction. What do I do? I pulled out my cell phone quickly made as if I had made a call, but naturally I pushed the button and took a picture!…Yes, but she lost nothing!…I can only appeal once more to everyone: Stand up and do something! We all have to help!…

The designation “burqa phantom” should not be understood as discrimination, but simply compassionate and sympathetic, since body coverings as Islam prescribes them are not worn voluntarily, rather — as often described above — in order not to be dismissed as a “whore” or even exposed to the danger of sexual violence.

The concept “burqa phantom” concerns the debasement of a woman when she is forced to wear a burqa and is thereby made “invisible” (“phantom”). More can be read in the book, “In the Land of Invisible Women” by Dr. Qanta Ahmed. She is a doctor and a Pakistani Muslim who had her medical education in the USA and made a professional practice in Saudi Arabia. In this book, she describes working for the two years in one of the most modern hospitals in Saudi-Arabia and yet women in this country are not allowed to drive. Even wearing seat belts is forbidden, because this emphasizes the feminine bosom, which is a sexual provocation for men.

So women are made invisible and their perception erased. They become a single mass. Men lose the possibility of optical orientation, and for that reason women can no longer come together with men of their own will, but only through family covenants and forced marriage. Women’s personalities are extinguished. They become specters.

The defendant’s statement is an acceptable evaluation. It is in essence true. Indeed, the concept “burqa phantom” has already achieved scientific significance in the controversy over the Islam-required body covering.

VI. On Point 7) of the Handout

One of our great problems today is that Mohammed is seen as the ideal man, the perfect human being. That is, the highest commandment for a masculine Muslim, to emulate Mohammed, to live his life, That does not proceed according to our social standards and laws. Because he was a war-leader, he was — so to speak — a relatively large consumer of women, and also got into it with children. We have huge problems with that today, because Muslims come into conflict with democracy and our value system.

In the document of November, 22, 2010, this was treated in reference to Point III.3.6.

In addition, we may point to all the previous remarks in this document which apply in part for this passage.

Further:

“Anyone who wants to judge the Koran appropriately, should be clear about one thing: For Muslims, God is the author of the Koran, not, let us say, its subject matter (in the sense that He is the subject matter of the Bible). The Koran is the basis of Islamic civilization. It is authoritative in a way that the Bible never was, not even in the Middle Ages. and it is the basis of the entire, prevalent understanding of the world. Nearly every Muslim who is asked — not just the extremists or fanatics, but thoroughly liberal Muslims too — will confirm the sacredness and inviolability of the Koran as the word of God.

[…] The Koran is relevant so long as Islam exists and Mohammed, who proclaimed it, is not a mere historical figure: He is the paragon of the perfect human being for one-and-one-half billion Muslims worldwide.

Proof: Reading pages 59-62, “III. The Koran: A Thematic Analysis, 1. The Significance of the Koran for Islamic Civilization and 2. The Biography of the Prophet Mohammed and the Origin of the Koran,” in “The Jihad System.” How Islam functions, by Manfred Kleine-Hartlage (2010) (enclosure ./90)

“The Prophet, by allowing himself, besides his wives, non-Muslim concubines, while simultaneously condemning all extra-marital relations of Muslim women in the Koran, likewise defined what is allowable in Islam and what is not.

A Muslim girl has relationships neither before nor outside of the marriage (and the marriage may only be to a Muslim). A Muslim man may take his pleasure extramaritally, but not with a co-religionist.”

sexual freedom is allowed Muslim men (naturally not women), insofar as the extramarital lady friends are not Muslims, and therefore may be unsanctioned, “unclean”;

a man may be married to several wives (which conversely is not allowed for women)”

Mohammed married the six-year old Aisha and consummated the marriage with her when she was nine years old!

The defendant’s statements are therefore true.

VIII. To Point 8) of the Handout

I remember my sister — I have told this a few times — when Susanne Winter said what she did, my sister called me up and said: “Good Lord, did you tell her that?” I answered: “No not me, but anyone can look it up; it’s not a secret.” And she: “You can’t just say that.” And I: “A fifty six year-old and a six year- old? What do you call that? Give me an example. What do we call that if it’s not pedophilia?” She: “Well, yeah, you have to use circumlocution, talk more diplomatically.” My sister is symptomatic. We have heard that so often. “Those were different times.” It wasn’t okay then and it is not okay now. And it is still happening today. That kind of thing can never be approved. They put reality aside because the truth is so gruesome.

Further to that in the document of November 22, 2010 under III.3.17.

For more, reference is made to what was said above about VI.

VIII. To Point 9) of the Handout

Which of you would have the nerve today to go out into the street, in front of the door and say: “Islam is crap!” That was just an example of the fact that we no longer have freedom of expression. We are bound by laws, anti-discriminatory in direction, and they are a huge problem. That is the end of “Islam is crap.” That’s the way it is.

In this respect, see Point III.3.24. in the document of November 22, 2010.

This statement was intended to illuminate the role of threats of violence for the purpose of intimidation. Threats of violence are misused by Muslims as collective duress on society.

“When bombs exploded in the London subway on July 7, 2005, the Muslim dignitaries on the island rushed to distance themselves from terrorism. At the same time, however, in the Muslim (and leftish non-Muslim) media, there began the usual debate about whether “the West,” here Great Britain, had not brought on the terror by its own policies, especially the Iraq war. The episode is characteristic for the game with divided roles, which is played between personal, peaceful, moderate Muslims on the one hand and the extremists and terrorists they allegedly condemn, on the other.

[…] The method ‘of sowing fear in the hearts of the infidels’ is kept alive by few but spectacular violent acts and threats of violence: The fatwa against Salman Rushdie belongs to these, the murder of Theo van Gogh, the murder of the nuns after the Pope’s speech in Regensburg, the attacks on the Scandinavian embassies after the publication of the Mohammed cartoons in Denmark.”

This serves as evidence that criticism of Islam, its members, its dignitaries or historical figures in every respect is to be prevented, so that fundamental human rights like freedom of expression can be trampled and Islam is enabled to erect totalitarian regimes where fanatics decide what is “just” and “unjust.”

Specifically, the defendant expressed criticism by putting the provocative question of what would happen if someone should claim that “Islam is crap.” As the defendant herself established in connection to this provocative question, she called it just an example of the fact that freedom of expression has already been constricted.

The defendant’s statement is true and is based on a permissible judgment.

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, MA

Previous posts about the hate speech case against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff:

Quote:It is not only in the Koran, but also in the Hadith, that it is allowed to deceive in war; and Muslims are in a perpetual war with us, that is clear. end quote.

I'd like to point out that not only is this a present-day truth, it's also a historical fact.The Muslim is committed to total and unending war against the infidel.Truces may be called so that he may gather his forces to attack soon afterward.But a permanent peace between Islam and the rest will never come about.Any professor of Islamic history who is worth anything will agree with these statements.

Jewel: That is one of the most thorough debunkings I have ever read. She's absolutely brilliant.

European women and those in America all have a debt of honor to Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff. It is a point of pride to regard her as a personal friend. Few more determined, eloquent and well-credentialed opponents of Islam exist short of apostates like Wafa Sultan and Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

[…] rather, precisely the anarchical structure of the umma leads in case of doubt to the escalation of conflicts which of themselves would be manageable. Clearly stated, it leads to Islam’s structural incapacity for peace.

… So we see that the true jihad norms which declare armed battle against the “infidels” to be the highest duty of a Muslim and make the health of his soul dependent on the readiness to kill and die “in the way of Allah,” are just the last link in an unbroken chain of standards which, applied and internalized as a cultural matter of course, constitutes Islam as a social system bent upon expansion at the cost of non-Muslim communities. Wherever Muslim societies meet non-Muslim societies, this system of norms and values provides that Islam tends toward their subjugation, subversion and destruction.”

A “structural incapacity for peace”. That says it all.

I am going to adopt that description as it is one of the most comprehensive and definitive observations about Islam that I have ever encountered. It explains both jihad and the endless internecine violence that trails Islam like vultures after a pride of lions.